Kibo insists Dartmouth's Philip J. Hanlon publish in Dartmouth student newspaper that the math department of Dartmouth College no longer teaches the con-art fakery-- slant cut of single cone is a ellipse for a single cone has but one axis of symmetry and a ellipse has 2, meaning the figure is really a Oval.

Kibo Parry Moron's kind words on Dartmouth College as "A voice crying out in the wilderness", the wilderness of science fakery.
On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 1:05:09 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"barking fuckdog" flunked the math test of a lifetime-generation test
> Judging from the increased spam and attacks
> autism meltdown has started...
>
> Spamming blithered:

Kibo Parry Moron demands Gerald Edgar & Dr. Panchanathan with the Ohio State Univ motto Disciplina in civitatem to publish their apologies for teaching mindrot bonehead science of conic slant cut a ellipse, an apology in the Ohio State Univ student newspaper that they now see the light of day slant cut in single cone is a OVAL, never the ellipse, Dorothy E. Aronson fake electron, F. Fleming Crim, Brian Stone, James S. Olvestad, Philip J. Hanlon fake electron, Joseph D. Harris, Walter E. Lawrence ever ask the question, which is the atom's real electron, the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law or the 0.5MeV particle that AP calls the Dirac magnetic monopole.
>
> Hooray, Kibo asking Edgar is the slant cut in his rectangular solid a ellipse, for the Single Cone has but one axis of symmetry yet the math failure Edgar still thinks a ellipse with 2 axes of symmetry is the slant cut.
Kibo on math failure Terence Tao,.. why Kibo? Because Terry cannot do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, or because Terry could never tell apart a ellipse from a Oval in his stupid belief the slant cut of single cone is a ellipse, yet a single cone has only 1 axis of symmetry.

Kibo on physics failures Sheldon Glashow,NSF Panchanathan, Roger Penrose, Reinhard Genzel, Andrea Ghez, Peter Higgs, Rainer Weiss, Kip S. Thorne, Barry C. Barish, David J. Thouless, F. Duncan M. Haldane, John M. Kosterlitz, Takaaki Kajita, Arthur B. McDonald -- too stupid to ever ask which is the atom's true electron-- muon or 0.5MeV particle.

Kibo on physics failures and cannot tell the difference between ellipse and oval
On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 2:14:19 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
"tard of physics" flunked the math test of a lifetime-generation test
> Math and Physics "crazy"
> fails at math and science:
>Drag Queen of Science, especially Physics
>
> Kibo Parry Moron nonstop govt paid stalker of 30 years---
> On Friday, November 5, 2021 at 12:27:26 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >"psychoceramic" Plutonium flunked the math test of a lifetime-generation test
> >of Physics "Kim Jong Un's minion"
> > fails at math and science:
> How much does NSF Dr. Panchanathan pay Kibo Parry Moron to stalk sci.math and sci.physics-- is it $100 per post, for I hope it is 0 per post otherwise that would make the NSF look like-- in Kibo's own words-- goonclod analbuttfuckmanure organization
>
> Kibo Parry Moron, why cannot any of these Nobel physicists ask the simple question of which is the atom's true real electron, the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law, or the 0.5MeV particle that AP calls the Dirac Magnetic Monopole? Is it raw stupidity or is it that they never learned Logic-- how to think straight, think clear?

> Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
> Language: English
> ASIN: B07PLP9NDR
> Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
> X-Ray: 
Not Enabled  

> Word Wise: Enabled
> Lending: Enabled
> Screen Reader: Supported 
> Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 
> Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #578,229 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
> #1610 in Physics (Kindle Store)
> #8526 in Physics (Books)
> #18851 in Biological Sciences (Books)
>
>
> #1-9, 163rd published book
> Stellar System Evolution for Advanced Intelligent Life //Atom Totality science Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) Format: Kindle Edition
>
>
> Preface: This book explores the question of why the Sun has a planet with abundant life that evolved over 3.7 billion years ago into the advanced intelligent life of humans, yet the Sun has gone Red Giant initiation phase that threatens to destroy all life on Earth in the next few thousand years. The question of why even bother having advanced intelligent life if the home star quickly destroys that life and the planet it resides upon? Why bother with advanced intelligent life if it is put under such enormous stress and strain and energy to move to a distant satellite of Europa and Ganymede. Surely the Cosmic design must tell us why this is our fate.
> Cover Picture: is my iphone photograph of Europa.
>
> Product details
> • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09NQ65H9F
> • Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 15, 2021
> • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> • File size ‏ : ‎ 999 KB
> • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Print length ‏ : ‎ 60 pages
> • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
>
>
>
> #1-10, 161st published book
> PHYSICSOPEDIA -- List of 133 fakes and mistakes of Old Physics// Student teaches professor Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> Preface:
> A Physicsopedia is a book of the overall assessment and evaluation of the state of the art of Physics. It is like a report card. It is a total view of the science and a judgement of the science, both of the past, present and the direction forward into the future. Its greatest use is to alert readers and people in science of what is wrong with their subject, and as a ancillary use, to alert students what to avoid in college as a waste of time.
> It is not in alphabetical order but mostly, rather, has a ordering of what is most important at the start and only at the very very end. For there is no index.
> Physics is the most important hard science for every other science is a specialized part of physics. And Old Physics has three key huge mistakes that this book addresses. The true theory of the Universe is the Atom Totality, not the Big Bang which is a ridiculous theory. The true electron of atoms is not the particle of 0.5MeV which turns out to be Dirac's magnetic monopole, while the true real electron of atoms is the muon of 105MeV which is stuck inside a proton torus of 8 rings of 840MeV. This causes another huge mistake, for a mistake in physics usually has a cascade effect of more and more mistakes. When we take the true electron of atoms is the muon, means the Sun and stars shine not from fusion, but from that muon thrusting through the proton torus in a Faraday law of electricity and magnetism producing electrical energy. So our Sun shines from the Faraday law, not fusion. And this implies the Sun has gone into Red Giant phase with a solar radiation increase of 0.005% yearly increase. That implies all life on Earth is in danger of going extinct as the Sun becomes more and more Red Giant, and unless humanity moves out to Europa, humanity goes extinct.
>
> Product details
> • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09N18QPP1
> • Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 3, 2021
> • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> • File size ‏ : ‎ 1139 KB
> • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Print length ‏ : ‎ 82 pages
> • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled

> #2-9, 161st published book
>
> PHYSICSOPEDIA -- List of 133 fakes and mistakes of Old Physics// Student teaches professor Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> Preface:
> A Physicsopedia is a book of the overall assessment and evaluation of the state of the art of Physics. It is like a report card. It is a total view of the science and a judgement of the science, both of the past, present and the direction forward into the future. Its greatest use is to alert readers and people in science of what is wrong with their subject, and as a ancillary use, to alert students what to avoid in college as a waste of time.
> It is not in alphabetical order but mostly, rather, has a ordering of what is most important at the start and only at the very very end. For there is no index.
> Physics is the most important hard science for every other science is a specialized part of physics. And Old Physics has three key huge mistakes that this book addresses. The true theory of the Universe is the Atom Totality, not the Big Bang which is a ridiculous theory. The true electron of atoms is not the particle of 0.5MeV which turns out to be Dirac's magnetic monopole, while the true real electron of atoms is the muon of 105MeV which is stuck inside a proton torus of 8 rings of 840MeV. This causes another huge mistake, for a mistake in physics usually has a cascade effect of more and more mistakes. When we take the true electron of atoms is the muon, means the Sun and stars shine not from fusion, but from that muon thrusting through the proton torus in a Faraday law of electricity and magnetism producing electrical energy. So our Sun shines from the Faraday law, not fusion. And this implies the Sun has gone into Red Giant phase with a solar radiation increase of 0.005% yearly increase. That implies all life on Earth is in danger of going extinct as the Sun becomes more and more Red Giant, and unless humanity moves out to Europa, humanity goes extinct.
>
> Product details
> • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09N18QPP1
> • Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 3, 2021
> • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> • File size ‏ : ‎ 1139 KB
> • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Print length ‏ : ‎ 82 pages

Was looking at the Stanford Univ motto to see if any better than Dartmouth motto. To me, all Univ mottos should speak to truth and science, but no, Stanford is as warped as Dartmouth with their "The wind of freedom blows". Which would probably be a motto in politics but not in truth, knowledge and science. Maybe the motto of Stanford is one of the reasons Stanford never accomplished much in science in the first place-- they cannot even get a motto correct.

Apparently neither Edgar nor Panchanathan abide by Univ. mottos of Ohio State or Univ Ottawa. Both see science as some sort of "corrupt science to suit your own needs"

Kibo Parry Moron demands Gerald Edgar & Dr. Panchanathan with the Ohio State Univ motto Disciplina in civitatem to publish their apologies for teaching mindrot bonehead science of conic slant cut a ellipse, an apology in the Ohio State Univ student newspaper that they now see the light of day slant cut in single cone is a OVAL, never the ellipse, Dorothy E. Aronson fake electron, F. Fleming Crim, Brian Stone, James S. Olvestad, Philip J. Hanlon fake electron, Joseph D. Harris, Walter E. Lawrence ever ask the question, which is the atom's real electron, the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law or the 0.5MeV particle that AP calls the Dirac magnetic monopole.
> >
Kibo Parry Moron demands Dr. Panchanathan publish in Univ Ottawa "Deus scientiarum-- God is the master of the sciences" not a feeble Dr. Panchanathan who cannot distinguish a ellipse from a oval. Student newspaper publish his apologies for teaching mindrot bonehead science of conic slant cut a ellipse, an apology in the Univ Ottawa student newspaper that they now see the light of day slant cut in single cone is a OVAL, never the ellipse, Dorothy E. Aronson fake electron, F. Fleming Crim, Brian Stone, James S. Olvestad, Philip J. Hanlon fake electron, Joseph D. Harris, Walter E. Lawrence ever ask the question, which is the atom's real electron, the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law or the 0.5MeV particle that AP calls the Dirac magnetic monopole.
>
> Hooray, Kibo asking Gerald Edgar is the slant cut in his rectangular solid a ellipse, for the Single Cone has but one axis of symmetry yet the math failure Edgar still thinks a ellipse with 2 axes of symmetry is the slant cut.
Kibo on math failure Terence Tao,.. why Kibo? Because Terry cannot do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, or because Terry could never tell apart a ellipse from a Oval in his stupid belief the slant cut of single cone is a ellipse, yet a single cone has only 1 axis of symmetry.

3rd published book

AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section // Math proof series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Ever since Ancient Greek Times it was thought the slant cut into a cone is the ellipse. That was false. For the slant cut in every cone is a Oval, never an Ellipse. This book is a proof that the slant cut is a oval, never the ellipse. A slant cut into the Cylinder is in fact a ellipse, but never in a cone.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07PLSDQWC
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 11, 2019
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 1621 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 20 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
•
•

Proofs Ellipse is never a Conic section, always a Cylinder section and a Well Defined Oval definition//Student teaches professor series, book 5 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Last revision was 26Jan2022. This is AP's 68th published book of science.

Preface: A similar book on single cone cut is a oval, never a ellipse was published in 11Mar2019 as AP's 3rd published book, but Amazon Kindle converted it to pdf file, and since then, I was never able to edit this pdf file, and decided rather than struggle and waste time, decided to leave it frozen as is in pdf format. Any new news or edition of ellipse is never a conic in single cone is now done in this book. The last thing a scientist wants to do is wade and waddle through format, when all a scientist ever wants to do is science itself. So all my new news and thoughts of Conic Sections is carried out in this 68th book of AP. And believe you me, I have plenty of new news.

In November of 2019, I was challenged to make the definition of Oval a well defined definition. I took up that task, and fortunately I waited a long time since, 2016, my discovery that the oval was the slant cut into a cone, not the ellipse. I say fortunately because you need physics in order to make a well defined definition of oval. You need the knowledge of physics, that electricity is perpendicular to magnetism and this perpendicularity is crucial in a well defined definition of oval. When I discovered the ellipse was never a conic in 2016, I probably could not have well defined the oval at that time, because I needed the 3 years intervening to catch up on a lot of physics, but by November 2019, I was ready willing and able. Then in August of 2020, I discovered a third new proof of Ellipse is a cylinder section never a conic section, using solid 3rd dimension geometry of ovoid and ellipsoid.

Cover picture is a cone and a cylinder on a cutting board and that is an appropriate base to place those two figures because sectioning means cutting, and the cuts we want to make into a single cone and a cylinder is a slant cut not a cut parallel to the base of the figures, nor a cut that leaves the figure open ended but a slant cut that leaves the figure a closed loop.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B081TWQ1G6
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ November 21, 2019
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 2021 KB
• Simultaneous device usage ‏ : ‎ Unlimited
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 50 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled

#11-2, 11th published book

World's First Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus// Math proof series, book 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Last revision was 15Dec2021. This is AP's 11th published book of science.
Preface:
Actually my title is too modest, for the proof that lies within this book makes it the World's First Valid Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, for in my modesty, I just wanted to emphasis that calculus was geometry and needed a geometry proof. Not being modest, there has never been a valid proof of FTC until AP's 2015 proof. This also implies that only a geometry proof of FTC constitutes a valid proof of FTC.

Calculus needs a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. But none could ever be obtained in Old Math so long as they had a huge mass of mistakes, errors, fakes and con-artist trickery such as the "limit analysis". And very surprising that most math professors cannot tell the difference between a "proving something" and that of "analyzing something". As if an analysis is the same as a proof. We often analyze various things each and every day, but few if none of us consider a analysis as a proof. Yet that is what happened in the science of mathematics where they took an analysis and elevated it to the stature of being a proof, when it was never a proof.

To give a Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus requires math be cleaned-up and cleaned-out of most of math's mistakes and errors. So in a sense, a Geometry FTC proof is a exercise in Consistency of all of Mathematics. In order to prove a FTC geometry proof, requires throwing out the error filled mess of Old Math. Can the Reals be the true numbers of mathematics if the Reals cannot deliver a Geometry proof of FTC? Can the functions that are not polynomial functions allow us to give a Geometry proof of FTC? Can a Coordinate System in 2D have 4 quadrants and still give a Geometry proof of FTC? Can a equation of mathematics with a number that is _not a positive decimal Grid Number_ all alone on the right side of the equation, at all times, allow us to give a Geometry proof of the FTC?

Cover Picture: Is my hand written, one page geometry proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, the world's first geometry proof of FTC, 2013-2015, by AP.

Product details
ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07PQTNHMY
Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 14, 2019
Language ‏ : ‎ English
File size ‏ : ‎ 1309 KB
Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Print length ‏ : ‎ 154 pages
Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #128,729 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#2 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
#134 in Calculus (Books)
#20 in Calculus (Kindle Store)